Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Excellent thread folks...agree, one of the best in a long time at FH.
IMO, naming lakes in reports is not something I like to do here at FH. I do it sometimes, but more on the rare side nowadays, even if it is already a popular BOW. #1 reason is lurkers. These folks just steal info here for personal gain and contribute/share nothing. It is a one way street of information. If somebody PM's me looking for info I'm most likely to share as there is at least some sort of two way info exchange going on, not just the sucking of info.
I don't think every "lurker" out there is just out to nab info. True, there are probably plenty of folks who do make the rounds looking for hot reports and juicy details. But I'll bet there are several who also like to read the reports for fun, enjoy the fish pic's and just choose to not actively participate in the dialogues. So I suppose it's not fair -- as a point was made earlier -- to generalize that all lurkers are trolls (in every sense of the word).
I don't think anyone wrote that every lurker was using information gleaned from websites to poach. Most are probably people who don't want to get involved, which is fine. Having said that, it only takes one or two poachers to ruin a fishery in a small lake or in a creek. Naming specific spots definitely helps this kind of lurker.
One thing that I do not understand in this thread is the idea that you would need some report to find the fish in any given lake.
I spent most of last season roaming from lake to lake in Ontario (& a little in Quebec) and renting the cheapest utility boat possible and catching fish before taking the boat back at 4:00PM. I caught nice fish everywhere I went.
I was only skunked one time when I spent 3 hours on the Ottawa River. That is where I took the scariest boat ride of my life in a 12' flat-bottom Jon Boat and an 8HP engine. It was fast (in the bad way) and very unstable due to the lack of weight at the bow. But that's another story.
The point is that we are blessed with excellent fishing in Canada and you would have to try pretty hard to not catch fish with basic knowledge of lake structure and fishing technique.
If I catch something nice in a big lake like Rice Lake then I do not see why I could not post a picture of my big bass next to something as obvious as a weedline or mouth of a river. But like others, the location of a great small lake is mine alone.
That photo of those bass is sickening! To me anyway. The sad thing here is its probably perfectly legal(providing its in a state/province that has an open season now)Many do. I think in this day and age, with the numbers of anglers today, fish possesion limits should be lowered. I think lowering the daily limit of most game fish from six to two is nessesary to maintain stocks in heavily fished waters. Musky, should be catch and release only.A perfect example of where this has worked in the past is Charleston and Big Rideau lake. Twenty years ago both those lake's Lake trout populations were on the verge of collapse. Strict regulations were imposed. Ice fishing was ceased, seasons shortened and daily possesion limits reduced. Now twenty years later, there is a pretty decent Lake trout population. It is however supplemented with stocked fish. Every year though, I always catch a couple of real beautiful "natural" Lakers, so they are reproducing and the regs seem to be helping.
Theres no need to keep six fish, not with the number of days that we as anglers today, are afforded on the water. Personally it wouldn't bother me to see all catch and release, but I realize its not nessesarily a viable option. Stocking lakes is not really the answer either. As long as limits remain where they are "anglers", like our two friends in the previous photo will continue. I saw a small lake near Ompah, that i had fished bass in for years, literally destroyed in three summers by a group of three individuals. They had just purchased this small recreational property on this lake. I was out there fishing one day and just smokin the largies. These guys watched me catch and release probably twenty bass(all released) before they started hollerin at me. I glided over twords shore and chatted with them for probably 15 minutes or so. They were full of questions about what I was using and so on. I answered thier questions and brought up the topic of catch and release. I stressed the importance it would play in a lake this small.At the time they said,"Oh yeah we release everything." Everytime I've been there since, these guys are out, fishing with live frogs with a stingers full of Bass.(Big ones, small ones, it didn't matter.) The fishing in this lake has noticeably and rapidly declined. To my knowledge, they never took more than their daily limit. This is a real shame when this happens. As long as the limits remain where they are, this "legal" raping of our waters will continue.
CATCH & RELEASE IS THE ONLY MANAGEMENT PRACTICE THAT WILL PRESERVE OUR FISHERIES!!!
That's my rant.....
Clap_For_The_Wolfman wrote:
That is disturbing and sad. It's sights like these that convinced me to become a 100% C&R fisherman starting in 2007 (so far, so good). 2006 wasn't bad either - kept a total of 6 hammerhandles and one largie, but only because it was deephooked and would never have survived.
I have nothing against those who stay within the legal limits but I see plenty of immigrants who do not care about the laws and keep everything they catch. Please save your PC speeches about my mentioning of 'immigrants' because it is a fact that they do break the law the majority of the time from what I have witnessed. In Florida, it was mostly Hispanics and in Canada, it is mostly the Asians and East Asians. It is probably cultural, but it is not good for all of OUR Canadian fisheries.
I'm inclined to agree. I'm Russian, but I pretty much refuse to fish with 'my own kind' (except dad). The diplomats are the worst. Poachers, all of them! I've seen them do some disgusting things. The worst was one time they caught a decent sturgeon, cut her open and took out the roe, then threw the fish back in the river One of the foulest things I've ever seen.
This will be a little lengthy, and I apologize, but I'd like the opportunity to address some of the many points that have been brought up here.
I believe McQ summed it up better than I ever could in another thread, when he pointed out that the Internet has definately evolved over the years. Now by "evolved", I am referring to the fact that there is much more information readily available on the Internet with a few clicks of the mouse, and most everyone has access to this information these days. How many of us actually own Encyclopedias now? How many of us actually use phone books instead of Canada411? How many paper statements are we getting these days? How many people have used the Internet to find out information on how to fix something, and then done it themselves, instead of phoning someone to come and fix it, and paying them to do so?
The information world is changing for sure. How do we control it so as to not negatively impact people or businesses who once spent many years learning their particular skills, only to have the Internet make those skills available to the everyday Joe who took the time to read about it? Difficult to answer for sure, and I don't think there is any one answer that would address the topic.
So as it pertains to Fish-Hawk, and the questions at large...here is my take on them.
Q: Is Fish-Hawk guilty of causing pressures on bodies of water? A: I don't think this site is any more guilty than any other site that has a fair amount of traffic on it. In all topic areas, the number of websites that are created are expanding every day. Fishing is just one of those topics, and there are lots of sites out there. Are we guilty of causing of pressures? I suppose that if providing information on places to fish is admittance of guilt, then yes we are guilty, but no more guilty than any other place where you can get information. Magazines, CDs, television, and every other form of media promotes our great outdoors, and places where you can dgo to fish. I recently read in a fishing magazine, the top 100 places to fish in Canada. It's information that people want, and there are lots of places to get it. I don't think we can single out this site over others, no matter what model that's used....and of course the question of whether or not these presumed pressures are negatively impacting the fish population, is something that could only be argued with statistics relating the population to the number of fisherman who fish these areas and also get their information from the Internet, otherwise it's just speculation.
Q: Are we guilty of providing information to people who don't register and contribute to that information source? (some call them lurkers) A: Yes we are. Fish-hawk is an open public board which provides information to anglers all around the world. We don't force people to participate as registered users, and don't have a problem with so called "lurkers" visiting the site and reading what's going on. Before message boards became popular tools on the Internet to include that "interactive component", the only thing people could do was read the information. Some will decide to register and participate, while others will not. There are no conditions to anyone using this site for information at this time, but perhaps our model should be revisited, and modified slightly, to keep up with the evolution of the Internet.....not becuase we don't want people to have full access and participate regularily, but because many have expressed some good points about doing so, and I can't dismiss those points. Our current model does have it's pros and cons....but then if you really think about it....don't all models have pros and cons?
Q: Are we guilty of providing a source of information for poachers who use that information to break the law and deplete our natural resources? A: I'm not even sure how to answer that question. I would like to think that it's a pretty long stretch, but a good point I suppose. Would restricting access to certain areas of information, specifically the main Fishing Talk area and perhaps the Fishing Reports section, prevent poachers from simply registering just to read the information, and use it to conduct illegal fishing activities. Are there advantages to having readers register? I think if people want to do illegal things, then they will always find a way to get it done. I don't see how we can possibly control the way people use the information they obtain, whether it be from the web, word of mouth, lodge reports, magazines, or any other forms of media, but I do see a potential opportunity to put some measures in place to at least try and be preventative. I don't think I would convert the site into one which requires a certain level of participation in order to remain privy to its information. If I were to do this, then we'd be making Fish-Hawk into more of a club of close friends, which is the very same model that is used on ReelBuddies. If this is the model you're looking for, then I'd recommend you check out their site. There are a lot of good people on that site, many of whom I personally know, and who were once very active here. Their needs were different however, and ReelBuddies is better suited to what they were looking for. It's just not what we're going for here.
Q: Does Fish-Hawk look down negatively at people who choose to post reports, but not identify the body of water upon which their report is referring to. A: I personally don't. If people post pictures and stories, but don't want to identify where they caught the fish, then it's not really a report....it's a story. I like stories, even more than reports. They give people a chance to experience what the angler has experienced, and put themselves in their place.
Q: Does it make sense to even post a report that doesn't mention when and where? A: Again, if it doesn't mention when and where, then it's not a report...it's a story. There are a few people who have chosen not to post about where they are catching fish, and that's perfectly OK with me.
As an example, and I only mention these people because they've been quite heavily active on this site either in the past or in the present, and have gone through the various stages of information sharing, have seen some personal impacts of sharing that information, and hav made their personal choice to not post that information on public boards. RJ and Markus have some really good points about posting certain information on public message boards, and I respect that point of view, as everyone should. It may not be your point of view, or your personal experience, but it's a choice that was made, and there's nothing wrong with that choice. It doesn't mean I don't disagree with some oppinions RJ or Markus may have, but in this particular case, I see their points.
I don't personally see the harm in posting the name of the body of water in a report or story. It's pretty general for the most part, and there's a lot of water out there. I think we've learned over the years that perhaps posting something like "the south side of the lake, in front of the big white house, with the float plane docked outside, second fallen tree on the right of that plane", is definately giving away too much information. There is merit in respecting the hard work anglers put into finding spots, but then again...what about the guy who went to school to learn how to fix washing machines and makes their living doing it. I recently fixed my washing machine just by looking up how to do it on the Internet. Have any of you found things on the Internet, that you'd otherwise have to call and pay someone to do for you? I suppose I've taken away business from someone, but the information was there, and I used it. Should we be doing what we can to stop the evolution of the Internet? A little extreme maybe, but just trying to make a point. For the most part, the problem arises when an angler who likes to share information, posts about a spot that is the so called "secret" spot of another angler who wishes to keep that spot quite. This is the root of the problem in my oppinion, and the only thing we can do is educate on how much information is too much.
This is where we get into another topic of conversation. How do you react to people who post their oppinions? I don't believe being rude to that person, calling them out, using words like idiot or something worst, or threatening people over the keyboard is the right approach, no matter how entertaining it may be to some people. I won't run a site like that, and will not be held responsible for providing the venue upon which people take advantage of in order to flex their muscle. This just a general statement of course, not pointing fingers at anyone. I'm just looking to run a clean, respectable fishing site which shares relevant information to promote and educate on the sport of fishing.
Believe it or not, I've battled with the idea that Fish-Hawk.net, and the information we gather and openly share, may actually be negatively impacting the quality of angling in the water bodies that people regularly visit here in Eastern Ontario. I always come to the same answer every time I think about this. That answer being that evolution cannot be stopped. Information will continually become readily available, and it's only going to get harder to control. Do I have the answers on how to combat this? Nope! Can I stop it? Nope! Should I shut this site down because it communicates a lot of information? Nope! There is more information shared on this site than just where to go and fish, and I learn lots everytime I read new posts...on all topics of conversation. Fishing Reports are only a small part of the site.
So.....how do we move forward? My goal has always been to create an Internet site where people can learn how to fish better, share experiences, find information on what's going on in the industry and the sport, and for people to meet new friends. I think for the most part, we are accomplishing this. Is it perfect? I don't think so, but I do think it is pretty good information for the most part. Perhaps with a few tweaks here and there, we can cooperatively make it better. I'm open to suggestions.
OTRA wrote: As far as pressure goes, isn't it self correcting, by that I mean if an area gets a great deal of pressure to the point the fishing is affected, doesn't the number of people fishing it goes down.
OTRA...You are correct I guess.....but why would a fisherman ever want to do that to a spot or lake that he cherishes?
G'day RJ, how you?
Same ol same ol goin round and round here I see.
"OTRA" must mean "Other Than Rational Angler"........... If enough people fish a place hard enough, the number of fish caught will fall, and people will leave........................duh??
Where does that remind you of RJ? How MANY places I mean? Anyone posting here who revealed good spots got SUCKED IN ROYALLY.
Theys comin more, but not smarter.
After spending a few years as a regular poster here, I wouldn't tell anyone Jack sh@t. But, it's TOO LATE.
Ol Bopper there, just wantin a place for anglers to have fun and share. Making money has nothing to do with it, right?
Jigs, you've added a twist here that needs a bit of massaging.
The internet is not free, there are costs in infrastructure and time. Any operator who is independantly wealthy could run a site without any intention of making money but then again they didn't become wealthy by giving things away.
We don't live in an altruistic world - the sixties are past (that particular mind set was doomed to failure).
There are as many reasons for board participation as there are sign on names and every one is valid.
The thread we are handling here has to do with information sharing and the ramifications of providing too much information. Is there such a thing?
My reality is that based on my many years of being on the water, in the tackle business and sharing ideas on everthing from lure design to popular hot spots has brought a very valid point forward.
The fishing experience I am enjoying today is more rewarding than ever. Change is the reason - better equipment, more education and certainly the participation of more people online who have furthered the information available by just being there and asking as well as giving.
Is there any merit in challenging someone for providing a detailed location or technique to the world at large? Just go back and review magazine articles, TV shows, etc. and see how content has changed and become more in line with sharing the total experience, not just the infomercial presentation of the sponsors or advertisers. We demand and expect information today from all sources, it's just easier to get it from a dedicated website.
Now, some of us will never be able to readily accept change for any number of reasons but the prime one has something to do with being too set in our ways to realize that we have been wrong for a long time.
Everyone who has the ability to share - should and it is reasonable for them to set their own limits on how far or how detailed that information should be. On the receiving end we should be able to take that information and use it to suit our set of values, certainly not to be subjected to criticism or biased opinions from others.
Like I have said in the past, you don't know who is reading these posts, anyone can just come on and read them. Its a great idea to post stories and fishing trips and stuff and giving info but in my opinion keeping info like where and how you got the fish to PM's and stuff, its always good to share info with friends and stuff but it gets kind of anoying to see people leaving their garbage at lakes as if they are fishing under the bronson bridge or something, or using minnows then releasing them in the lake, the poeple who have to work a little to find these lakes and actually find them are the ones who know how to appreciate these lakes. It's one thing to see eight or nine other people at the lake but its another to see them throwing beer bottles in the water and cigarette wrapers on the ground, if trout aren't bitting it doesn't matter if theres only one person or a hundred poeple at a lake, they just aren't bitting. Its to easy for someone to come on here and read where the good spots are, and I don't mean members of fish-hawk but poeple who just don't care what happens to the lake.
but hey, thats my opinion
My thought is that if someone really wants to know where you fish, they can ask you via PM and you can decide whether or not you want to share that info. I have never asked anyone to divulge where they caught something if it isn't incuded in their report. Obviously if they wanted to state it, they would have. If I PMed someone asking for the location, I would expect them to say no...until such a time as I had earned their trust and respect here.
Sharing info among the community can still be accomplished once there is a certain level of respect and trust formed between group members. I would limit sharing "sensitive" info like location to PM. This would still allow lurkers to enjoy the content on the site, but protect sensitive info from the undesireables out there...
For me, posting the location of a great trout lake on the open board is not in the best interest of your spot, even if you are really generous and feel like sharing, you are asking for trouble in my opinion.
I purchased my first boat in the late fall. I have been fishing since I was a kid, but I am no expert. I am happy to have found a site like this. It is a huge source of information for a rookie like me. I personally like to fish for bass, so I am on here everyday looking for new places that I will be able to try out, and appreciate the members who say what places are good. It doesn't have to be specific. I am not going to go out and fish that lake all the time. I like to try new places, it's half the fun. And I don't eat fish either. So I always catch and release.
But as members of this forum we all have to respect others right not to disclose where they fish. We all know that poaching is a serious problem, and from what I read it may get worse this year due to lack of resources on the Ontario side. I am sure for every poacher there are more people who genuinely want to learn from others. As a rookie I am sure I will make plenty of mistakes out there, but being able to read all the different posts and hopefully meet some people from here, those errors will become less and less.
As far as the lurking goes, I don't know about anyone else, but many times I come on here without signing in, so I may appear to be a lurker. Mistake number one, "ALWAYS SIGN IN ON FISH-HAWK"
Live and learn.
See ya on the water this summer!!
One of the foulest things I've ever seen.
G'day RJ, how you?
If enough people fish a place hard enough, the number of fish caught will fall, and people will leave........................duh??
